The Message

Spectrum Website
#1

A couple of days ago a friend of mine posted on Facebook a quotation from Kurt Vonnegut that was critical of Christianity. In response, someone pointed out that Vonnegut was an atheist and questioned whether we should be seeking knowledge or enlightenment from him (I assume because he was an atheist, although that was not explicitly stated). Now my friend has friends from all over the religio-political spectrum so I tend to avoid commenting because I don’t have as much time for Facebook debates as I did in my younger days. On this occasion though I could not help myself. I asked, “If what he is saying is accurate, does his being an atheist disqualify him from being heard? Has God ever spoken through someone who was not amongst His chosen people?”

It is true that we have a tendency to attempt to discredit the messenger instead of the message. Anecdotally I have found that this often occurs when we either can’t, or don’t feel confident in our ability to, intellectually undermine the message itself. We do this in almost every walk of life. Someone’s political analysis is flawed because they’re a liberal or a conservative. Someone’s sociopolitical analysis is unreliable because of their race or their gender. As I thought about this person’s comment, I was reminded of the fact that even one who would become Jesus’s disciple was initially reluctant to believe in Jesus because he was a Nazarene. For some reason, the labels (and the labeling) allow us to look past what can best be described as cognitive dissonance presented by the messenger’s cogent critique.

These thoughts came to me again as I watched Alicia Johnston’s important coming out video for the second time this week. I normally would be afraid for any person taking such a public stance on such a controversial issue in this way. And I fully admit that those feelings still reside in me, as unreasonable as they may be. While that fear seems unjustified, I think I am fully justified in being fearful how labeling will affect the power of her very important message and the cogent critique she raises.

Johnston raises important questions, coming from her history, that it is important for the church to wrestle with if we are ever going to meaningfully address the LGBT community that already exists among us. It should bother us that members of the LGBT community see a God in us that is far from loving and kind. It should bother us that our words and actions lead people to depression as opposed to away from it. It should bother us that theological questions about the moral propriety of same-sex relationships are decided by people for whom the question is long-settled before they entertain any of the arguments. These are important questions and they should not be dismissed simply because we don’t agree with the life choices of the person who raises them. If she’s wrong then we should be able to address whatever errors exist in her thinking without treating her identity as a pejorative. If she’s right, then who she is cannot be more important than doing the work of improving ourselves based on the flaws she brings to light.

Jason Hines is a former attorney with a doctorate in Religion, Politics, and Society from the J.M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies at Baylor University. He is also an assistant professor at Adventist University of Health Sciences. He blogs about religious liberty and other issues at www.TheHinesight.Blogspot.com.

If you respond to this article, please:

Make sure your comments are germane to the topic; be concise in your reply; demonstrate respect for people and ideas whether you agree or disagree with them; and limit yourself to one comment per article, unless the author of the article directly engages you in further conversation. Comments that meet these criteria are welcome on the Spectrum Website. Comments that fail to meet these criteria will be removed.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at http://spectrummagazine.org/node/7988
2 Likes
#2

Jason Hines. said in responding to Johnson’s journey:
_“Johnston raises important questions, coming from her history, that it is important for the church to wrestle with if we are ever going to meaningfully address the LGBT community that already exists among us.”

When you can find common ground, it becomes so much harder to be hateful. Prejudice is based on two things, ignorance and fear.In his first inaugural address to the nation, Abraham Lincoln emphasized “the better angels of our nature.” It’s something that applies today as we witness progress among a range of people to understand each other rather than to demonize your fellow human beings. The increasing support and understanding among the younger generation is likely to grow. We need to listen and do what Jesus taught us to do.

5 Likes
#3

Thank you. Great thoughts. Especially this:
“It should bother us that our words and actions lead people to depression as opposed to away from it. It should bother us that theological questions about the moral propriety of same-sex relationships are decided by people for whom the question is long-settled before they entertain any of the arguments.”

9 Likes
#4

To the author of this article: Do you want the church to let down it’s guard and allow same sex couples into full fellowship ? Does the church’s position matter ? Ms. Johnston made her stance . The results of her actions are on her. The church wishes well to everyone , but it must uphold the principles that it lives by and promotes . In fact God has provided an answer in Genesis 18 and 19 . It is all in the number 10 .If 10 righteous could be found , God would save thousands of people in Sodom .Only the eye of wisdom can count to 10. Lot , his wife and two single daughter = 4 . But in Gen 19 :12-14 both the angles and Lot talk about sons-in laws - plural . That would mean that Lot had more than one married daughter . The number 10 in the bible is never used to refer to a number less than 10 . Abraham knew that 10 people had left his tent and gone to Sodom. We as Christians stand as salt to those who are in the world . God is not against anyone . He is calling all men to repentance .Same sex relations are outside of what is accepted by God . Yes , We can talk, but the standard won’t change . Let us pray for the church.

2 Likes
#5

“It should bother us that our words and actions lead people to depression as opposed to away from it. It should bother us that theological questions about the moral propriety of same-sex relationships are decided by people for whom the question is long-settled before they entertain any of the arguments.”

What if it isn’t our words and actions producing the responses of which you speak, but rather, the Lord’s through His Word? What if it isn’t people deciding the moral propriety of the relationships in question, but the One who created us, and who thus holds the right to define our values and behavior?

Here again we see the fissure that runs through contemporary Adventism—between a spirituality that sees transcendent truth articulated by a supernatural God as the definer of ultimate reality, and a spirituality which sees ultimate reality as individual, subjective, and culturally conditioned.

2 Likes
#6

I’m not the author of the article but the answer to your question is simple. Yes!

5 Likes
#7

i’m thinking now that alicia’s resignation may have been premature…as i understand her case, alicia came to the point where disclosing her sexual orientation to her congregation felt like the honest thing to do…that is, not disclosing it came to feel dishonest…but she seems to have tied this noble decision to the notion that a disagreement with the GC must mean severance from employment in the sda church…she seems to have offered her resignation because she expected she would be required to do so if she didn’t…

but do we certainly know that foothills community adventist church, the arizona conference and PUC would not have rallied to alicia’s side had they been given the opportunity to do so…a non-heterosexual orientation, in and of itself, doesn’t represent disqualification from church employment or membership…even if alicia were to eventually form a lesbian partnership, she would merely be in disagreement with our official position on marriage, which is not one of the seven enumerated pillars of our faith articulated by our prophet, who actually calls for fewer marriages as we approach the end of time, 5T:366 (these seven pillars of our faith are contained and spread out in eight of our 28 fundamental beliefs: 11, 13, 18, 19, 20, 24, 26 and 27)…being in disagreement with the GC on something that is not a pillar of our faith is really what our WO debacle is about, and alicia must know that hundreds of pastors, not to mention millions of members, are in disagreement with our official position on WO, which represents the minority position of scholars in our BRI and andrews seminary…alicia must also know that at least one church in her union is baptizing practicing homosexuals, and that it is local churches who are vested with authority to decide these cases…

i believe that there is a clear biblical and egw teaching on homosexuality, but i also know that this teaching is comprehensive, and very hard to grasp in all its bearings, particularly in the case of someone born with a non-heterosexual orientation, but also in the case of someone born with a heterosexual orientation who has no idea of what he doesn’t know or feel…the cape town sexuality summit in 2014, paid for by the church membership, but participated in by a limited number of invitees, was a good beginning…but such a small scale effort cannot be considered definitive…it cannot be expected to have fleshed out the contours of the inspired view on homosexuality to rank and file members, which is where agreement on this question needs to resonate…alicia is bright, articulate and attractive…were she still in church employment, the arizona conference could have hosted a massive open forum summit on homosexuality with alicia as chairman…all interests in our church could have been invited to present their case, which could have been broadcast live through 3ABN…the rightness or wrongness of each view could have been clearly established in the minds and hearts of onlookers, which is the certain result when truth and error are laid side by side…surely the holy spirit would have been present to convict, as he has in all major gatherings of god’s people since the beginning of recorded time, if he saw that his people were truly there to understand truth in order to do it…the level of interest in such a summit would have been sky high, and no doubt even non-adventist attention would have been galvanized…

but now, unfortunately, our church doesn’t have such an opportunity because a voice who could have led in a discussion of a question of relevance that all could benefit from has resigned…the message that is left is that someone born with a non-heterosexual orientation has no place in the remnant church, and isn’t someone on whose behalf jesus is working so hard in the heavenly sanctuary…this is simply wrong…perhaps alicia should be invited to reconsider her resignation…

#8

Beautifully and lucidly stated, Jason.

The tragedy/travesty/ of the Alicia Johnston debacle, is that one day after her "coming out " she was NO LESS a pastor than before.

She has honed and developed her wonderful ministry of pastoring in several congregations and over several years, as well as many years of college and theological study. What a waste of her talents, when the church rejects her!

More particularly when a great percentage of our current pastors in NAD are due to retire in the next ten years!

Had Pastor Alicia been an Episcopalian instead of an Adventist this would have been a non-issue, since gays/lesbians both single/unmarried and those in committed monogamous relationships, are permitted to pastor in Episcopalian congregations.

Our Methodist brethren last year elected a BISHOP to head the eight westernmost states of USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. ( Somewhat equivalent to our Union Conference President ).

This elected bishop of the Western Jurisdiction of the United Methodist church, is a lesbian woman, having previously pastored a large congregation in San Francisco.

The retiring male bishop, whom she succeeded,stated.:
“We are all people of God regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation or abilities.
We would be blessed to invite ALL God’s people to their rightful place at the table.”

What a loss for Adventism, that Pastor Alicia has been denied her rightful place at God’s table.

4 Likes
#10

I am not convinced that simply because other churches - Episcopalians, Methodists, etc. - do things, that that is what the Seventh-day Adventist Church should do! At least, I don’t believe that that is the standard that we are called to.

1 Like
#11

belatedly she did the right thing. If one disagrees with an institutional position then the proper thing is to disassociate. In the present climate rational accommodation is impossible. So long it has been good to know you, until I understood your bias.May the Gospel indite us both to a unshakable confidence in the redemptive power of the cross.,

#12

I would wager that as contrary to your assumptions, it truly “bothers us” to have the LGBT community see a God in us that is far from loving and kind. It should bother us…" Otherwise, it won’t be an issue at all. And inasmuch as it truly bothers us, for those who are inflexible and rigid the next step is to deny it and then project it onto others. By doing so, we can be critical and express our disgust, feeling safe and sanitized from afar. Two factors are involved in these steps, failure to develop empathy and development of maladaptive coping skill known as projection, also two important factors necessary and crucial in feeling virtuous and righteous.

3 Likes
#13

“between a spirituality that sees transcendent truth articulated by a supernatural God as the definer of ultimate reality, and a spirituality which sees ultimate reality as individual, subjective, and culturally conditioned.”

I believe that you inadvertently highlighted the true issue…one cannot separate a human being from an human experience. When one tries to do so, we fail. We are simply human beings with spiritual experiences living in an imperfect world. Some things are impossible for us to understand on this earth and to think that we do is delusional.

3 Likes